4.7 Article

Experimental and theoretical study of critical heat flux in vertical upflow with inlet vapor void

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER
Volume 55, Issue 1-3, Pages 360-374

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2011.09.028

Keywords

Flow boiling; Separated flow; Critical heat flux (CHF)

Funding

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) [NNX09AJ51A]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study explores the mechanism of flow boiling critical heat flux (CHF) for FC-72 in a 2.5 mm x 5 mm vertical upflow channel that is heated along its 2.5 mm sidewall downstream of an adiabatic development section. Unlike most prior CHF studies, where the working fluid enters the channel in liquid state, the present study concerns saturated inlet conditions with finite vapor void. Temperature measurements and high-speed video imaging techniques are used to investigate the influence of the inlet vapor void on interfacial behavior at heat fluxes up to CHF as well during the CHF transient. The flow entering the heated portion of the channel consists of a thin liquid layer covering the entire perimeter surrounding a large central vapor core. Just prior to CHF, a fairly continuous wavy vapor layer begins to develop between the liquid layer covering the heated wall and the heated wall itself, resulting in a complex four-layer flow consisting of the liquid layer covering the insulated walls, the central vapor core, the now separated liquid layer adjacent to the heated wall, and the newly formed wavy vapor layer along the heated wall. This behavior in captured in a new separated control-volume-based model that facilities the determination of axial variations of thicknesses and mean velocities of the four layers. Incorporating the results of this model in a modified form of the Interfacial Lift-off CHF Model is shown to provide fairly good predictions of CHF data for mass velocities between 185 and 1600 kg/m(2) s, evidenced by a mean absolute error of 24.52%. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available